Gedankenaustausch zu AR

Es ist deutlich, dass AR nicht so gut angenommen wird wie die vorhergehenden Module.

Woran könnte das eurer Ansicht nach liegen?
Und was sollte ein Modul beinhalten, damit es mit einer guten Anzahl Spieler starten kann?

Ich habe mich mit Andreas Bringedal, dem ursprünglichen Schöpfer von AR, über dieses Thema insbesondere in Bezug auf AR unterhalten.
Hier mit Einverständnis von Andreas und Klaus, weil ich ihm für AR47/48 nicht in die Parade fahren möchte, ein paar Auszüge aus unseren Gesprächen.

The Avalon module doesn't have the dept that it should have had but it's major fun with the proper game setting. It's epic in a proper Legends way. Also the map is very well formed, perhaps the best of all modules. The status tree is the best by far of all games that I've played (haven't played all the german modules). Just wonderful. And now it has a great new twist with the sea cities that force ship use for the first time...if it works. Plus all races now have racial quests that are more powerful and inventive than most quests, yet they shouldn't be unbalanced...in theory anyway. Gorgoroth is a character in the game. I like that. Not all games have gods walking the earth. Really dislike the split religions, one schizofrenic god might work but not two.


I made one suggestion to Klaus a few weeks back that he liked fairly well. It was not a complete idea, just a sketch.

A much more complete idea would be something like this:

If you want to have the two games system then give the flowerpicking game some teeth!

The (Carnivore) Flowerpicking Game:
There is a king's peace in effect over the whole map except for the 4 victory cities. The players pay only 1/3 the normal turn cost and can send in turns as often as they'd like up to one per day. Setup characters have no spells, no startup guilds and all startup soldiers have javelin and shield in order to reduce setup work for Klaus. There are no clashes or other GM created action (except his involvement in special actions)., again to reduce GM work. Victory is to take and hold the 4 victory cities for two weeks(up to 10 turns). So it's mainly a game where the players can try out the game for a much cheaper cost than normal. Also, you can acquire some cross game information for the real game. You will still have 100% survival security, but will have the excitement of conquering the 4 major cities and being able to win the game.

The Real Game:
Absolutely all exploitation of game weaknesses are forbidden. Like suicide character building, pop seg rotation TG selling or whatever. No stealing of equipped items from bashers when in parties(which is the cheap way to kill them and which has caused many a player to drop Legends permanently). Strongly increase the cost of Increase SEI and Reduce Loyalty spells to prevent abuse(perhaps by 20 base cost). Market the game as one where all the players have the same fair chance of winning because all abusive tactics _you_(the general player, not you Jens) don't know about are banned.
* TL 30.
* 2 month King's Peace.
* Production every 4th turn. The game is unplayable with production every second turn!
* No more than 8 Guild Increase SEI actions per city per month.
* Unlimited SEI, max 8 PW per month.
* Pop Growth Cap turned OFF. Crowns cap turned OFF.
When the SEI cap was introduced, the population amount per player was reduced by somewhere around 75% for all players, This lead to a constant shortage of population in all games and very frequently caused in-faction conflict over scarce resources. Market it as back to the original non dumbed down game but without the bugs and flaws.

Start with many characters in order to make the game more equal between the very good and not so good players. It will nearly be like starting the game at say month 6 but at equal power levels, instead of as in normal games where the good players will be strongly ahead in power. Make sure the players know this. It should make it more interesting for both strong and weak players as the weaker player will have better odds than in regular games and the stronger players will get stronger opponents able to give them more fun. Plus you don't have the 6 month low-action part of the game (that bore me so much), yet you still have a buildup phase due to few startup soldiers and population.

Setups are:
Overlord CDCCBBBBAAAA. The D character is either a Dragonslayer or a pet Dragonlord character. 1 lvl 8 guild.
Hero Dragonslayer: FEDCCC 1 lvl 8 guild.
Hero Dragonmaster: EDCCCA where the D character is a pet/enslaved Dragonlord. Maybe not call them 'lords' anymore since they're owned by regular races? 1 lvl 8 guild.
Dragonslayer characters must be of the nomad races. All dragonslayer and dragonlord characters start with -30 Tactics.
This way all positions can, and must be part of a faction.

* Give the player's startup city Superior Walls. Can't stand games that start with the best of something.
* Remove the AA Wall Increasing spell, or nerf it. It makes the game unplayable if used.
* Only one faction of each type to simplify the startup process. I don't think it adds much to allow the possibility of say two dark dwarf factions. Simplicity is usually best.
* Place the racial adventures in the module rules to show the players something new and exiting.
* Add more items that give marks (marks aren't as powerful as most people think).
* Add more items that give free mana(between 5 and 10).
* Increase attack factor on 601+ weapons by 200% (straight add). 601+ weapons that are weaker than P4 weapons is not good for the game, unless there is a specific reason.
* Give all main character racial adventures a resurrection scroll like in Nic, except don't let it work on laid to rest characters.

Fix Trainingtypes:
* Replace the swamp dwellers TT with the Defenders like in Anjora but with even more DF and a large negative AF bonus. For instance +20 DF and -250 AF. Set cost to 200.
* Rename Warrior Monks to Fey Knights and exchange the Berserker requirment with Assassin. Set CF to 15, difficult terrain OM to 15. Fey Knights is a much better name
* Rename Knights to Footmen.
* Rename Light Cavalry to Outriders. Set CF to 6 and DF to 4. Give -30% OM vs walls.
* Rename Heavy Cavalry to Knights. Set DF to 16, AF -100%, Lance to 300%, cost to 400 and give -50% OM vs Walls.
* Archers, set CF to 10, DF to -8, Missile Add to 350.
* Longbowmen, set CF to 20, DF to -8, Missile Add to 400.
Note that longbowmen defending cities will usually reach the 500% af cap so some of this missile add will be wasted, as intended. Also note that missile attacks are halved in value from the rear slots so the 400 really only means 200.
* Change Myrmidion into Heavy Footmen. Base the stats on Footmen but increase CF to 10, AF to 80, DF to 6, Attack Walls to 10%, cost to 200. (Myrmidion is greek mythology and has nothing to do in european myth which is the one used in Avalon and also most other legends modules.)
* Reduce sighting modifier of Shadow Rangers to -5.
* Mageknights, Set SA to 20, Set DF to 3.
* Mages, Set SA to 10.
* Knight Templars. Set cost to 600.
All the name changes makes the game fit much better with european medieval fantasy myth.
As you can see all TT are now much more differentiated which will make each one more useful and also make the combat system function as intended.


Cheers,
Andreas

> For quite some time I had the idea of an Utterly Legendary Weekend Bash.
> Easy setups done the week before with the game Starting Saturday at 10 AM,
> a 10 hours break from midnight to Sunday 10 AM, and the closing of the curtain
> on sunday midnight. The winners would be determined by achievements
> on monday, which would be a turn-free day, so Klaus could get some sleep.
> Turns every 2 hours with a fixed price for the whole bash.

The problem is that the turns take too much time to write so you wouldn't get very far and also that bashers and overlords have such different time scale for their turn writing. Better to have one game for bashers with perhaps half an hour between turns and another game for overlords with 1-2 hours turns.

It would also help speed things up if all characters started with 5 actions at E character strength as well as reduce the cost and level of 209, plus a no crowns cap on craftsmen and a lot more startup craftsmen, perhaps 2000 extra, maybe also no growth cap. Then you could have less characters overall which speeds up gameplay, no buildup phase of characters which also speeds it up, no need for lenghty TG routes which speeds up the game in two different ways (less wait and less work). Influenced non module characters would then be fairly inconsequencisal and only important for the pop and soldiers you influence. So a weekend game could work with these and/or similar adjustments.



> In other words, I like your take on the Carniflower game - although I do not like
> to imagine how many people would lose their jobs.

..oops

> KP-free victory cities in an otherwise peaceful game is a great idea. It offers some
> exciting battles while still keeping ones main assets secure. Covert action
> against slot leaders would have to be dealt with. Kidnappings could be either
> forbidden or abducted characters would have to be released after 2 weeks.

But covert actions doesn't work in King's Peace areas. In the 4 VC areas, the armies will protect slot leaders from all covert activities if they are large enough to conquer the 5000 city defenders behind legendary walls. If you go there without an army and get kidnapped, too bad for you


> This would create a carebeary atmosphere of friendly competition,
> but no true possibility of loss. (Does this sound like your average MMORG...?)

I've always loathed the no VC games because the heart has been taken out of the game. Yet I understand the need for stressless games. I might even have joined one of these ones, where I would before not even consider it.


> The Real Game:
> Great Idea - back to the basics without the crap!
> That would be so much better than The Exploitation Game
> The gamesettings sound soundly thought through (affirmative alliteration action
> activated...) as do the trooptypes. This variety adds some spice to the game.
> In Anjora I like about the TTs that you have to train something else than MKs,
> but when a Thunderlord (Berserker) is equal in a simulated battle to a Paladin
> (Knight), why do we need three different TTs which are exactly worth the same.

It's not completely thought through. I think the DF gains for knights/cavalry) us a bit to high.. They should probably also have some penalties in rough terrain, perhaps -10-20% OM.

Also a TL of 24 might be better than 30. It's hard to know what works best. Too high and you get strong problems with extreme players as well as imbalance vs TT, Racial, Status and Mount CF. I like 24, it was the original max gain for both PC and Str/Dex. It fits my symmetry need

Also I'm not quite sure about the character balance between overlords and bashers. I don't want the bashers to be able to bash 4+ lairs a turn, yet I don't want to make them so weak that they can start as overlords instead and be equally good bashers, just with the extra pop and soldiers. Going more extreme might be the trick, giving heroes 3 F-H character and the overlords one F dragon and increasing the monster strenght. Then the overlords CBA characters would be useless to bash with. But this seems a bit too extreme.

The list of things to ban is a bit difficult. You could easily make people annoyed with to many bans. They need to be carefully thought out. Personally I don't like the ban on raising other's guilds beyond lvl 8. That's a horrible idea imo. First it's the first 8 levels that are important for prestige pooling, secondly, why should it be illegal for a faction to try to make one strong faction guild for reasearch or prayer. Makes no sense to me.


> What do you think about Mithril in your starting province and AA spells like
> Call Mithril Vein - is it good or bad for a game, that you can put all your eggs in
> one basket from the beginning on?

If you start with mithril, then you can tear down your starting walls and make legendary walls before you do the +200 wall size adv. So I don't like that. Also there are a Call Mithril Vein spell in the game so you will get it later. So you do have this option a bit later in the game. Think you may need a couple of hundred mithril to cast the spell.


> The Exploitation Game:
> Yes, for fools sake, go ahead with it, so people can fiddle with the engine and
> what could be achieved be corkscrewing ones basic order to fit them in the
> 150 frame. But don't bother me with it...


> I am sceptical about the Dak/Merman/Giant Faction: The boni are to good,
> +12 Admin, +10 tactics, Marks all around. Where are the severe drawbacks to
> counterbalance it - not enough Pop?

The humans and elves also have the +12 admin and +10 tac so they are negated vs those factions. The eastern factions, dwarves, orcs and barbarians have a larger area with makes them somewhat stronger. The marks are much weaker that people believe, imo. Also dwarves and trolls have marks too.

Another huge gain they have is that they have excellent TG potential. This might be their best feature.

They do have a drawback in that they start at sea and have to fiddle with ships to get around.

They also have only 4 cities to influence and probably close to no non module cities like daks and giants. So this may effectively remove prestige influence as most other factions take for granted. This can mean a lot. Compare these mermen with no location influence with any other races that influence 10 locations with 10 decent characters, 20 000 pop and 2000 soldiers.

BUT, the main balancing factor in any game is the multiple factions that may oppose you. So if the merman faction alone is as strong as the rest of the factions combined, the game is still balanced(provided people recognize the strenght of the faction).

However, I do think that mermen could have a -20% OM on land.

Anyway, imo it's an error to have the need to balance everything on a feather weight. It leads to the need to eliminate most fun things because very often they in some way are imbalanced. I think that is the reason why the game has been dumbed down so heavily. In this ideology, every choice has to be exactly equal. You can see it in modern computer games like the diablo style games (but not so much in diablo itself). You will be nearly exactly of the same strenght no matter what skill development choices you take. You do equal damage to a monster wether you do it by magic missile, an arror, or sword. So if you chose blindfolded, you are as well off as if you try to make good choices. So I'm not a fan of equalizing.




The games have to be made fun again, and the gameplay has to be made faster. The GMs need to recognize that today's games are way faster and more intense than the old games. People are used to much more action these days and it has to be reflected to some degree in Legends too. That means faster game starts, like 3 action characters and with better stats. Imo, there should be very few characters in the whole game with less than 3 actions. Perhaps just 20% of the non prestige characters. It may take a year to build up a character and in a 18-24 month game where you influence a character at month 6, that's ridiculous.

Also I can't shake the Anjora of just playing a role in a theatre play. All actions for the next 15 months is already decided and the outcome is rigged (balanced) so you will end up equally strong as the opposition (which means it has all been a waste of time). It feels like I can't choose my own destiny but have to follow the script. And if I don't have to follow the scrip, why is it there in the first place? Perhaps I'm too anarchistic ) I like quests that place less restrictions on the player. That way you are still free to do as you please, yet can still follow the adventure chain and gain the benefits.

Sometimes Less is More. Not only regarding Anjora quest styles but for instance the ban on aiding allies in building their guild. The more good rules you have, the better the game is, the more marginal rules you have, the worse the game is.

Enough ranting!

Cheers,
Andreas

Hallo zusammen,

ich kann ja nur mal Stellung dazu nehmen, warum ich nicht dabei bin. Abgesehen von meinen laufenden vier Partien ist mir das einfach zu Groß. AR und Powerlegends zusammen ist einfach ein (Zeit-)Killer. Ich halte AR insgesamt für ein sehr reizvolles Modul und fände es wirklich schade, wenn es, ähnlich wie OR, wegen der schwachen Beteiligung auf der schwarzen Liste landen würde. Aber AR selbst ist ein Powermodul in dem man ohnehin schon als Regent durch die neun Super-Chars in kürzester Zeit Megapositionen aufbauen kann. das ganze jetzt noch mit Powerregeln kombiniert, heißt, dass ich vom Ersten Zug an soviel (Planungs-)Zeit investieren muss, wie in einem normalen Legendsspiel nach ungefähr Einem Jahr. Und das wird nicht weniger. Ich hatte eigentlich Lust wie in AIA46 einen Drachenlord zu spielen, weil das Spiel mit Monstern mal so was ganz anderes ist und man es auch ruiger angehen lassen kann. Da ich dann aber so einen Megaregenten spielen muss, ist das für mich gestorben. Ich hatte gehofft, dass die Drachenlords als eigene Position in die Parteien eingearbeitet werden, wie z.B. die Drillinge in WA42. dann würde ich so einen "Exoten" sicher gerne wieder spielen. Aber die Regentenposition in AR ist mir definitiv zu mächtig aka Zeitaufwändig.

Ansonsten ist an AR nichts auszusetzen und am Powerlegends auch nicht. Ich bin ein Fan von beidem , nur nicht zusammen, das ist ein bischen zuviel des Guten - im Wortsinne - .

Rüdiger

Ganz klar ist es mir ja nicht, was die Motivation für diesen umfangreichen Beitrag ist, und ob ich das nun in english oder auf Deutsch zu beantworten habe, aber da sich der Schreiber mächtig ins Zeug gelegt hat, hier meine Meinung.

Ich für meinen Teil bin in sehr vielen Punkten völlig anderer Meinung.

Ich spiele Legends, weil ich mir eben aussuchen kann, wann und wie viel Zeit ich investieren will, und alles was da unter 2 Wochen ist, ist mir schon zu viel, gar nicht zu reden von einem Wochenende, in dem ich Turns "en force" abgeben muß.

Diese ganzen Poweroptionen sind alle für nichts
- in meinen Augen,
ich weiß das es eine ganze Menge Munchkinplayer gibt, denen das Spaß macht, und die sollen das ruhig angehen, aber offenbar sind es nicht mehr als 20 inzwischen,

eine zweite Partie auch noch zu spielen, damit ich was davon habe, ist nun endgültig das Aus für jedes Interesse bei mir.
AA hat für mich auch noch alle Dinge, die ich überhaupt nicht mag,

massive Anfangsunterstützung, was den Vorteil von Spielern, die sich Gedanken über eigenständige Spieloptimierung machen verschwindend gering macht,

die Möglichkeit zum Poolen dieser Ressourcen, was jeden Einzelspieler von vornherein aussiebt, und die Möglichkeit durch massiven "Mißbrauch" der Modulvorgaben ungeheure Vorteile zu erlangen, in dem man zum Beispiel Drachen über Parteigrenzen poolt.

Das auch noch ein Wald- und Wiesencharakter endgültig für nichts ist durch die massiven Spezialcharaktere ist nur das I-Tüpfelchen.

Da muß ich ganz klar sagen, bevorzuge ich das Anjora-Konzept, auch wenn hier mit dem MoP für mich bereits wieder die Grenze überschritten wurde, was aber durch Einschränkung von Zeichentransfers noch machbar ist.

Manchmal habe ich den Eindruck, daß es Spielern das liebste wäre, wenn sie auf einer Random-map zu Spielbeginn einfach alles bekommen, und dann ohne sich weiter Gedanken zu machen über herrliche Questen oder eine feine Spiel(ab)stimmung gegeneinander lospowern können.

Wems gefällt dem wünsche ich Viel Vergnügen,
aber es gibt eben auch Spieler die auf Atmosphäre stehen, und deren Hauptfreude es ist, Dinge zu entdecken!

Es gibt für mich mehrere Gründe, warum ich weder bei AR47 noch bei AR48 dabei bin.

Der mit Abstand Bedeutendste ist einfach der Zeitfaktor. Mit einer Groß- und einer Kleinposition in WA41/42 bin ich mehr als ausgelastet. Insbesonders wenn es zum Ende eines Projekts geht, kann es sein, dass der Zug schon mal einige Zeit warten muss.

AR47 ist mir zu langweilig. Ich hatte damals die Idee einer Partie ohne GAs ins Spiel gebracht - mit der direkten Ansage, dass das für mich persönlich nichts wäre. Um wirklich vorne mitzuspielen, muss man die 150 Basisbefehle ausquetschen wie eine Zitrone. Es sind so viele Exploits möglich, welche normalerweise durch die GAs verboten sind. Dies ist nur noch reines Numbercrunching und hat für mich persönlich mit interessantem Spiel nichts zu tun.

AR48 reizt mich nicht, weil es bis auf die Auswertung zu Spielende keinerlei Wettbewerb gibt. Es wird ein schönes ruhiges Spiel werden, in dem man herrlich seine Position aufbauen kann, ohne Sorgen vor aggressiven Nachbarn haben zu müssen. Man kann viele Dinge ausprobieren und sich einfach zurücklehnen.

Es gäbe zwei einfache Änderungen die AR48 in meinen Augen interessanter machen würden.
Erstens, wie von Andreas vorgeschlagen, die Aufhebung des KP in den 4 zum Sieg benötigten Städten. Das gibt wenigstens ein paar Möglichkeiten, sich auch militärisch mit seinen Mitspielern zu messen, während die gemütliche Carebear-Atmosphäre aufrechterhalten wird.
Und zweitens eine Änderung der Startaufstellungen. Der Regent verliert seinen Dragonlord, da er indiesem Spiel schon genug zu tun hat. Der Held entscheidet sich, ob er Drachentöter oder Drachenfreund wird. Der Drachenfreund bekommt anstelle eines C-Charakters einen Drachenlord als Nebencharakter.
Jede Position startet natürlich in einer passenden Partei. Auf diese Weise werden auch Spieler angesprochen, die Freude daran haben eine Drachenposition aufzubauen, ohne sich um Bevölkerung kümmern zu müssen.

Diese beiden Punkte sollten sich leicht durchführen lassen und würden das Spiel meiner Ansicht nach deutlich beleben.